Archive
2007 |
2006 |
2005 |
2004 |
2003 |
2002
2007 - In the News
“Further evaluation once teachers are in the classroom is essential to ensuring a strong workforce,” write Ron Haskins, the co-director of the Brookings Center on Children and Families, and Susanna Loeb, an economist at Stanford University, in a spring 2007 policy brief, “A Plan to Improve the Quality of Teaching in American Schools,” published by the Washington-based Brookings Institution
Education Week
January 10, 2007
“Human Resources a Weak Spot"
"The American economy provides a huge boost to the mobility of first-generation immigrants," writes Ron Haskins, immigration expert with the Economic Mobility Project, a bipartisan research effort of the Pew Charitable Trusts that examines the state of the American dream.
The Wisdom of Being Optimistic
WashingtonPost.com, December 21, 2007
When Congress set up the current child support system in the 1970s, recovering welfare costs was an explicit goal, with some experts arguing that it was only fair for fathers to repay the government for sustaining their offspring and that giving families the money was a form of ''double dipping.'' But experience and research have suggested to most experts and state and federal officials from both parties that the policy is counterproductive -- driving fathers into the underground economy and leaving families more dependent on aid.
Today, said Ron Haskins, a Republican expert at the Brookings Institution, "I don't think anyone thinks it's double dipping, especially because one of the major goals is to get more money to the mother so she can stay off welfare."
States Take Child Support, Leaving Mothers to Skimp
New York Times, December 1, 2007
While the white population has accumulated wealth, black families -- due to income disparity -- have not. This provides them with less to pass on to their children and grandchildren and causes the lack of generational mobility, or the movement of people across economic status in relation to their parents.
That prospects are worse for poor black children than other poor children is not surprising, said Julia Isaacs, the author of the report and a economics studies fellow at the Brookings Institution. There is literature on that.
Black Families Lag Significantly Behind Whites in Economic Mobility
IPS (Latin America), November 14, 2007
"Economic success in the parental generation ... does not appear to protect black children from future economic adversity the same way it protects white children," the study's author, Julia Isaacs, a scholar at the Brookings Institution, writes in the report.
U.S. Blacks Trail in Growth of Income: Report
Xinhua General News Service (China), November 13, 2007
"Overall, incomes are going up. But not all children are benefiting equally from the American dream," said Julia Isaacs, a fellow at the Brookings Institution, a Washington think tank.
Income Gap Between Families Grows
Associated Press, November 13, 2007
Most experts say the only real, long-term solution to poverty is improving the school performance of poor children.
That's much easier said than done, given the achievement gap for poor and minority students that has bedeviled educators for decades. To be successful, school changes will have to be more concerted and comprehensive than they have been, experts say.
It starts with ensuring that all poor children receive a high-quality early childhood education, said Isabel Sawhill of the Brookings Institution, an independent research and policy institute.
What Will Help Ease Poverty? Experts Point to Education, Incentives, Work That Pays
Omaha World Herald, November 7, 2007
More women in the work force is the main reason household incomes continue to rise, despite the steady decline in hourly wages, according to the Pew study. Families pay a steep price to maintain household income.
"Absolutely, there's a real cost to having two earners in the family," said Isabel Sawhill, a senior researcher with the Brookings Institution, who worked on the study. "There's less time to provide for all the other things, such as child care, and all the household work that needs to be done," Sawhill said. "You either have to do that in your spare time or purchase it."
Sawhill noted that child care is the "largest expense for a two-earner family by far. That needs to be factored into the assessment of whether people are better off or not."
The Incredible Shrinking Paycheck
Akron Beacon Journal (Ohio), September 30, 2007
Poverty is a formidable foe, but not insurmountable - even in today's penny-pinching climate, he said.
Haskins' battle plan: policies that encourage people to make wise choices, such as finding work, staying married, getting an education and keeping families small.
Welfare reform, which required that recipients work and placed limits on benefits, is an example of the behavior-changing policy that Haskins, a Republican, promotes. Women left welfare in droves to find work, and child poverty rates plummeted.
Expert: 'Golden age' of child welfare is coming to end
Salt Lake Tribune, September 13, 2007
"Poverty is more tied to the economy than in the past because so many of these single-mother families now work," says Ron Haskins of the Brookings Institution in Washington.
In US, fewer are poor, more are working
Christian Science Monitor, August 29, 2007
"I looked at the bottom 20 and 30 percent, and income is not rising," Ron Haskins of the Brookings Institution think-tank told AFP.
"At the very most, I would say the story at the bottom is mixed but I certainly would not say we are improving either income or, certainly not, earnings at the bottom," he said.
Report: 36.5 million live in poverty in US
Agence France Presse, August 28, 2007
Military programs ranging from the nearly century- old Junior Reserve Officers' Training Corps to the National Guard Youth ChalleNGe Corps, which began serving dropouts in 1993, offer lessons for schools and other youth development programs about what works in straightening out "rudderless" young people, according to a former president of the National Urban League.
"They seem to take more of a holistic approach to delivering education, training and personal development to young people than our schools do," Hugh Price told MII.
Youth Programs: 'Demilitarize' Pentagon Lessons to Steer Teens, Author Urges
Employment and Training Reporter, August 20, 2007
"If you review the history of federal social programs, they mostly fail," said Haskins. "The government is good at giving people money, but not very good at changing people's behavior."
The Good and Bad of Welfare Reform
Salt Lake Tribune, August 17, 2007
Ron Haskins, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution who authored the study, said there has been a large increase in the numbers of immigrants who have less than a 12th-grade education and who will therefore have lower wages.
"Study: Wages dip for immigrants"
Atlanta Journal-Constitution, July 26, 2007
If these patterns continue, it is likely that in 2030 the children of today's immigrants "will earn substantially less than nonimmigrants… Economic hardship may persist beyond the first generation and assimilation into American society may become more difficult," says the study, whose principal author is Ron Haskins, a scholar at the Brookings Institution. Mr. Haskins notes that just because immigrants contribute to inequality doesn't necessarily mean they consider themselves worse off, since they typically earn far more in the U.S. than in their native country. However, he said in an interview that the perception of their children might be different. "Things change quickly as people acculturate to America, and … start to compare themselves to Americans. If they perceive themselves not to make the same progress and opportunity, which in many cases includes material goods, that's a problem."
Immigrants and Their Kids Are Losing Ground Economically
Wall Street Journal, July 25, 2007
A high school education doesn't go as far as it used to in the U.S., however, a challenge for immigrants and American-born workers alike, said Ron Haskins, the report's author.
"Precisely at the moment that you get higher educational requirements, you get an influx of a very large number of immigrants with low education," he said.
"Economic Mobility Among Immigrants Slows"
Associated Press, July 25, 2007
As Ron Haskins of the Brookings Institution noted recently in The Washington Post, between 1991 and 2005, "the bottom fifth increased its earnings by 80 percent, compared with around 50 percent for the highest-income group and around 20 percent for each of the other three groups."
A Reality-Based Economy
New York Times, July 24, 2007
"Thirty years from now, you know these children will be the workers, the citizens. And if children are not living in conditions where they can flourish and do well, it won't be good for the country." Julia Isaacs, The Brookings Institution
National Public Radio
Marketplace, July 13, 2007
Children do better where both their biological parents are married. Don't take my word for it. Ask Isabel Sawhill and Adam Thomas of the non-partisan Brooking Institute in the U.S.
"The real victim of the Celtic Tiger has been our family life"
Daily Mail (London), July 4, 2007
Hugh Price, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution and former president of the National Urban League, said Thursday's decision was "disappointing but not surprising given the increasingly conservative perspective of the court."
"For those of us who believe strongly that school districts should advance diversity and that appropriate consideration of race is one of the ways to do that, this ruling, while a setback, provides rather clear signals about how to promote school integration and diversity in a way that a majority of Supreme Court justices probably would find acceptable," Price argued.
"Time to Stop Viewing Students as 'Components of Racial Class,' Parents Say"
CNSNews.com, June 29, 2007
Writing last week in The Washington Post - "The Rise of the Bottom Fifth" - Brookings Institution economist Ron Haskins called this return to work by poor families with children "the biggest success in American social policy in decades." The CBO numbers, he said, should make Republicans proud: "Low-income families with children increased their work effort, many of them in response to the 1996 welfare reform law that was designed to have exactly this effect."
"'Progressive' Politics not so Progressive"
The Globe and Mail (Canada), June 6, 2007
Welfare, still a budget drag even eleven years after welfare reform, is only the most obvious example. Isabel Sawhill at the Brookings Institution estimates that between 1970 and 1996, the growth of single parent families increased federal welfare and food stamps expenditures by $229 billion. Today, the federal government spends more than $200 billion annually on Temporary Assistance to Needy Families and Medicaid spending, and much of this spending is driven by family breakdown. Moreover, marital failure necessarily invites the government to meddle in personal relationships. This year, for instance, federal and state governments will spend more than $5 billion in efforts to identify, hunt down, and collect money from millions of nonresidential fathers across the nation and 17 million families.
"The F word"
National Review, June 6, 2007
The findings suggest "the up escalator that has historically ensured that each generation would do better than the last may not be working very well," says the study, which is scheduled for release today. The study was written principally by John Morton of the Pew Charitable Trusts, which is leading the series, called the Economic Mobility Project, and Isabel Sawhill of the Brookings Institution.
"Not Your Father's Pay: Why Wages Today are Weaker"
Wall Street Journal, May 25, 2007
The "welfare" charge is also refuted by the experience of the federal welfare reform passed 11 years ago. That law reduced the welfare eligibility of new immigrants on the sensible grounds that the magnet for America should be work, not a government handout. Ron Haskins, an architect of that reform and the author of a 2006 book on its consequences, concludes that "the use of welfare by noncitizens has declined rapidly" in the wake of that law.
"Immigration and Welfare"
Wall Street Journal, May 24, 2007
While the number of teen pregnancies has dropped by more than a third since 1990 and abortions among this age group have dropped by half, the rate of unwanted pregnancies among 20- to 24-year-olds has actually increased, and over half of all unwanted pregnancies occur to women in their 20s.
"Only the teens are making progress," said Isabel Sawhill, president of the National Campaign's board and a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution. "And that is something I find stunning."
"Women in their 20s Trust Luck, Not Birth Control"
Baltimore Sun, May 20, 2007
Expanding the earned-income tax credit directly rewards work, more than perhaps any other proposal. According to Ronald Haskins, a welfare expert at the Brookings Institution, this is why it enjoys wide political support.
"US Anti-Poverty Plan Promises Big and Quick Results"
Sunday Times (South Africa), April 29, 2007
Such policy talk-even from psychologists-sparks a useful conversation, says Isabel Sawhill, co-director of the Center on Children and Families at the Washington-based Brookings Institution.
"It is good research for policymakers to consider, but we shouldn't infer from this research that all our past efforts have been ineffective," she says. "I'm not in favor of just doing education, but I'm also not in favor of not doing it, either. We need to do some of both."
"Is Risky Teen Behavior All In the Brain?"
USA Today, April 24, 2007
But climbing higher is only one way to improve your lot, said Isabel Sawhill, senior fellow at the Brookings Institution. "It could be they are doing better because everybody is doing better," she said. "Or it could be that they moved up the queue."
"Dice Loaded Against Moving Beyond Parents' Level"
Atlanta Journal-Constitution, April 1, 2007
Proponents of the changes in welfare say programs that once discouraged work now offer support to people in low-paying jobs. They point to expanded eligibility rules for food stamps and Medicaid, the health insurance program for the poor, that enable people to keep getting benefits even after they start working.
'I don't have any problems with those programs growing, and indeed, they were intended to grow,' said Ron Haskins, a former adviser to President Bush on welfare policy. 'We've taken the step of getting way more people into the labor force and they have taken a huge step toward self-sufficiency. What is the other choice?' he asked.
"Public Assistance Rolls Increase Despite Welfare Overhaul"
Associated Press, March 19, 2007
"The culture is shifting, and marriage has almost become a luxury item, one that only the well educated and well paid are interested in," said Isabel V. Sawhill, an expert on marriage and a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution.
"Numbers Drop for the Married With Children"
Washington Post, March 4, 2007
"While people disagree about how social policy should treat adults who have been unlucky or unwise, there is something fundamentally unfair about making children's life chances hostage to the circumstances of their parents," Brookings economists Jens Ludwig and Isabel Sawhill wrote in a discussion paper released on Wednesday. "Children cannot choose their parents."
"U.S. Group Urges $40 bln/yr More for Early Education"
Reuters, February 14, 2007
We may quibble about the exact threshold over which a nation must pass to be described as a class society, but the latest research on income mobility is startling. As economists Isabel Sawhill and Sara McLanahan state in the fall volume of the journal they edit, The Future of Children, the American ideal of a classless society "is one in which all children have a roughly equal chance of success regardless of the economic status of the family into which they were born." In sum, they write, "the association between one's parents' income and one's own should be small."
"Goodbye Horatio Alger"
The Nation, February 5, 2007
Mr. Haskins said it was important to continue work requirements for most welfare recipients, along with government support for programs like child care and tax credits. Promoting the economic benefits of marriage is also important, he said, because a disproportionate number of single-parent families are poor.
"Childhood Poverty Is Found To Portend High Adult Costs"
The New York Times, January 25, 2007
"Both critics and advocates of the minimum wage have exaggerated its effects," says Isabel Sawhill, an economist at the Brookings Institution in Washington. "It doesn't do a great deal of harm. At the same time, it's no panacea for the low earnings of less-skilled workers."
"When the Lowest Pay Rises, What Happens?"
Christian Science Monitor , January 10, 2007
^ Back to top
2006 - In the News
The dramatic reduction in welfare dependency and child poverty that we have witnessed over the last ten years is remarkable; even more remarkable, perhaps, is a recently published book recounting the reform of federal policy, the most sweeping in decades, that led to these improvements. In providing a lively account of the personalities, policies, and politics that shaped the landmark welfare-reform legislation, Ron Haskins has produced an engaging primer on the complicated and arcane legislative process. In Work Over Welfare: The Inside Story of the 1996 Welfare Reform Law, the account of how a bill becomes a law receives a remarkably entertaining treatment, and the book should find an appreciative audience well beyond his fellow academics.
Haskins reminds us that years of preparation preceded a 1994 GOP majority that was not only in a position to implement reform, but was also committed to a reform that would demand an end to an open-ended entitlement and would require work in exchange for welfare. Because Haskins was intimately involved in every stage of the reform, his readers are treated to an insider's candid account of the contentious meetings behind closed doors and the careful choreography that played out in congressional hearings.
"Welfare Reform Made Interesting: Work Over Welfare is an amusingly told story of an important reform"
National Review, December 27, 2006
Ron Haskins, the House GOP staffer in charge of drafting the welfare-reform bill, has written an engrossing book about how this ambitious campaign proposal led to the most important domestic-policy change of our generation.
Haskins notes that by the late 1980s, a growing body of evidence confirmed that Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC) and other federal cash-assistance programs were worsening the plight of the poor by promoting dependency and discouraging formation of stable families.
Welfare Wonder
New York Post, December 11, 2006
"We have more inequality than we have had in any time since the 1920s, and that is not a good trend," agreed Isabel V. Sawhill, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution. "It does fan the flames of protectionism"
"Where I would start would not be to make one particular item in the market basket more affordable," Sawhill said. "Instead, I would focus on jobs and on making work pay and on supplementing the very low earnings that low-skill people make these days."
"A Roof Over Every Head"
Congressional Quarterly Weekly, December 9, 2006
"We've always viewed ourselves as a country that provides upward mobility to everyone who works hard, and that in America, you can achieve the middle class dream if you do so. And right now, the middle class is not doing very well."
Isabel SawhillCNN, "Lou Dobbs Tonight", October 19, 2006
We're told that America is the land of opportunity, and people can be what they want to be if they work hard enough. Yet a new academic study from Princeton University and The Brookings Institution found that it can take five generations for the effects of disadvantaged economic and education backgrounds to disappear.
"Mirror Gazing from 2 Sides"
Kansas City Star, September 28, 2006
We know now that it has worked even better than its architects imagined, with major implications for the way welfare systems will be designed in future and for the wider politics of social spending. According to the Brookings Institution's Ron Haskins, the numbers claiming benefit in the United States have shrunk by 60 per cent and there has been a 30 per cent increase in single mothers at work. The incomes of the families formerly claiming benefit, mainly headed by women, have risen, sometimes dramatically.
"Comment & Opinion: Britain would benefit from Clinton's tough love"
The Observer (England), September 3, 2006
In America, one of every four families is considered low-income and living paycheck to paycheck, according to the Washington, D.C.-based Brookings Center on Children and Families. The working poor also often make do without health insurance.
"Sisterhood helps neediest in community"
The Oregonian, September 25, 2006; Pg. B01
So what's the bottom line? Abstinence-only education is short-sighted, dangerous, and against the will of both health professionals and parents. In a country where 93 percent of men and 79 percent of women report having sexual intercourse prior to marriage, a federal policy that seeks to prevent its citizenry from obtaining the information it needs to protect itself is unconscionable. As Isabel Sawhill wrote for Brookings Institution, "Family and community values, not a federal mandate, should prevail, especially in an area as sensitive as this one."
"Just Say 'No'—To Sex"
FoxNews.com, August 31, 2006
"[The 1996 Welfare Reform has] been a triumph. It's the most successful social policy of our time. The result has been that the rolls have plummeted for the first time since the program was established in 1935. Mothers went to work in droves. It's unprecedented in Bureau of Labor Statistics records that any demographic group would have such a rapid increase in employment."
Ron HaskinsThe News Hour with Jim Lehrer, August 22, 2006
Brookings Institution scholar Ron Haskins, a former Republican House staff member who has written a new book about his front-row seat at the welfare debates, noted that the 1996 reform also strengthened child-support enforcement, expanded funding for abstinence education, made it easier for faith-based groups to provide welfare services and ended welfare checks to newly arrived immigrants as well as to prisoners and substance abusers.
"Taken together, these reforms constitute the most fundamental change in American social policy since the Social Security Act of 1935," Mr. Haskins wrote in "Work Over Welfare: The Inside Story of the 1996 Welfare Reform Law."
"Ten Years After, Welfare Reformers Look to Build on Gains"
The Washington Times, August 21, 2006
"The achievements of the 1996 welfare reform law, combined with generous, public work supports for mothers, are now sending a strong signal from government that welfare dependency must be replaced by employment. The success of this agenda opens new opportunities for government, working with the private sector, to intelligently address some of the nation's leading domestic problems."
Ron Haskins"Welfare Reform Ten Years Later: The Next Step: strengthening marriage and job incentives"
The Baltimore Sun, August 20, 2006
Making education work. Former Capitol Hill welfare expert Ron Haskins, who just completed a book on welfare reform, singles out poor education as the biggest impediment to more progress. Many of the women who end up on welfare either don't graduate from high school or do so with useless diplomas. Because of their poor education and skills, women who leave welfare for $7-an-hour jobs rarely work their way up to $14-an-hour jobs that would make them independent. And those who do win pay increases see an offsetting drop in supports such as food stamps and child care.
"Radical Change Yields Huge Returns, New Problems"
USA Today, July 31, 2006
Hugh Price, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution, former president of the National Urban League and an Alpha, told a luncheon crowd that the biggest time bomb in the United States right now is the state of elementary education. He said the reading gap by race and income was too wide, citing statistics that 58 percent of black fourth-graders read below grade level.
"Alpha Fraternity Brothers, Locking arms for Change"
The Washington Post, July 29, 2006
Still, there's a lot here for everybody to like—work for conservatives and work-contingent government benefits for the left. The irony of welfare reform is that it firmly implanted the conservative principle of self-sufficiency in federal policy which, in turn, brought the liberal principle of government support for the poor into its most effective form—namely, encouraging work.
Ron Haskins"Welfare Check"
The Wall Street Journal, July 27, 2006
After reviewing numerous studies for a book, "Opportunity in America," to be published in September with Princeton University, Brookings Institution scholar Isabel Sawhill told me this week that "the place where you're likely to get the biggest bang for the buck is making investments in children from less-advantaged families."
"To Close 'Opportunity Gap' US Kids Need Quality Preschools"
Roll Call, June 22, 2006
The figures are startling. According to Emmanuel Saez of the University of California, Berkeley, and Thomas Piketty of the Ecole Normale Supérieure in Paris, the share of aggregate income going to the highest-earning 1% of Americans has doubled from 8% in 1980 to over 16% in 2004. That going to the top tenth of 1% has tripled from 2% in 1980 to 7% today. And that going to the top one-hundredth of 1%—the 14,000 taxpayers at the very top of the income ladder—has quadrupled from 0.65% in 1980 to 2.87% in 2004.
Put these piece together and you do not have a picture of ever-widening inequality but of what Lawrence Katz of Harvard University, David Autor of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and Melissa Kearney of the Brookings Institution call a polarisation of the labour market. The bottom is no longer falling behind, the top is soaring ahead and the middle is under pressure.
Melissa Kearney"Special Report: The rich, the Poor and the Growing Gap Between Them—Inequality in America"
The Economist, June 17, 2006
Finally, it isn't right to dump our debt ont he next generation. What responsible parent would go out and buy himself or herself a Mercedes, on credit, and tell his 5-year-old: "You can pay it off for me in 25 years"? That's just about what we're doing with our nation's finances: In doing nothing to curtail the growth in debt, we're effectively leaving the bills to be paid by our children and grandchildren.
You can call it irresponsible, immoral, or just plain stupid—and you'd be right, whatever adjective you chose. It's time to demand that the president and Congress put a moratorium on any new tax cuts or spending increases. In particular, lower tax rates on dividends and capital gains should not be extendeed, and the estate tax should not be repealed at this time. That, at least, would get us headed in the right direction.
Isabel Sawhill"Ignoring Debt Makes it Worse"
The Phildelphia Inquirer, April 30, 2006
The most striking outcome has been the staggering decline in the welfare rolls, so large it has left even reform enthusiasts agog. At their peak in 1994 ndash; the rolls began to shrink before 1996, because many states had already instituted experimental reform programs—there were 5.1 million families on Aid to Families with Dependent Children, the old program. Almost immediately, the numbers went into freefall, and by 2004 there were down by 60 percent, to fewer than 2 million. A lot of reform opponents—the unreformed, so to speak—tried to chalk this up to the booming economy of the later 1990s. But according to former congressional staffer Ron Haskins, author of a history of the reform due out this fall, that doesn't make sense: in the 41 tears between 1953 and 12994, he points out, the welfare rolls had declined only five times, and only once (between 1977 and 1979) for two years in a row. Compare that with the present case, when the rolls continued their fall even after a recession began in 2001, and when 2004 marked the tenth continuous year of decline.
Ron Haskins"How Welfare Reform Worked"
City Journal, Spring 2006
Policymakers must think out of the box in order for ex-offenders to avert the trap of perpetual unemployment. Converting otherwise wasted years behind bars into transitional jobs based on good behavior will transform the debt they've paid to society into a dividend for society.
Hugh Price
"Transitioning Ex-Offenders into Jobs and Society"
The Washington Post, April 10, 2006
Isabel V. Sawhill, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution, a research organization in Washington, said the broad decline in welfare caseloads in the last decade could be attributed to three factors: an unusually strong economy in the late 1990's; the federal overhaul that encouraged recipients to find work and financially penalized those who did not; and policies that expanded access to food stamps, child-care subsidies and the earned-income tax credit.
"Welfare Rolls Falling Again, Amid Worries About Poverty"
The New York Times, April 6, 2006
"This is a very important source of information about low-income families, and we need more information about low-income families," said Ron Haskins, a letter signer and senior fellow at the Brookings Institution in Washington, D.C., who in 2002 served as senior advisor for welfare policy to President Bush. "It's the longitudinal part that's invaluable."
Ron Haskins
"Plan to Cut Major; Census Survey Draws Outcry"
Herald News, April 3, 2006
"Whether you're pro-choice or pro-life, everyone ought to agree that preventing unintended pregnancies is a good thing to do," said Isabel Sawhill, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution.
"First-of-Its-Kind Study Cites Impact On Teenage Girls and Poor Women"
The Washington Post, March 1, 2006
Think of President Bush's budget proposal as a Christmas wish list. He may have lots of "I wants" on the list, but he's not going to get them all.
In fact, each year there are several proposals that most observers -- Democrats, Republicans and policy experts -- agree have about as much chance of getting approved as you have of finding a 2003 Ferrari Enzo ($643,330, 217 mph top speed) in your driveway Christmas morning.
Isabel Sawhill, director of economic studies for the Brookings Institution and a former Clinton administration budget aide, said she barely has researched this year's proposal. "I find so often nowadays these documents are so dead on arrival, they are not worth the time to study."
"Budget realities: What the president wants, he rarely gets"
Gannett News Service, February 8, 2006
The proposed $2.77 trillion budget would boost Pentagon spending by almost 7 percent, and also increase the budgets for the Departments of State, Veterans' Affairs, and Homeland Security. The budget would cut $182 billion over five years in areas outside of defense and homeland security. . . . "There's a fairness issue here," says Isabel Sawhill, a senior fellow in economics at the Brookings Institution. "We're basically cutting programs that serve low-income families and the middle class in order to pay for tax cuts that go overwhelmingly to the very wealthy. Even some Republicans have been uncomfortable with that."
"Who Will Feel Budget's Impact?"
Christian Science Monitor, February 8, 2006
Congress approved a $750 million, five-year plan aimed at building healthier marriages Wednesday as part of its deficit-reduction bill. The measure now goes to President Bush. It includes $100 million a year for marriage-related programs and $50 million a year for fatherhood programs. This is the first time Congress has earmarked money for marriage programs, says Ron Haskins of the Brookings Institution's Center on Children and Families.
"Marriage Initiatives Get Federal Funding"
USA Today, February 2, 2006
At least eight academic studies have concluded that the quality of marital relationships is linked to the quality of parenting. In other words, happy two-parent homes are more likely than unhappy ones or single-parent homes to yield happy children who grow into successful adults. Researchers assess marriage "quality" by measuring such behavior as supportiveness and conflict. They assess parenting quality by measuring behavior such as the frequency with which parents engage in activities with children and the way they discipline kids.
"It's a gradual accumulation of evidence from lots and lots of studies that show, over and over again, that the best rearing environment for a child is a married-couple family," said Ron Haskins, a social scientist at the Brookings Institution and former welfare adviser to Bush, who strongly supports the effort.
"Budget Ups Federal Role In Promoting Marriage"
Congressional Quarterly, January 13, 2006
Isabel Sawhill, director of economic studies at the Brookings Institution, projected that the net benefits of offering pre-kindergarten to all 3- and 4-year-olds whose parents approved would add another $ 988 billion to the nation's Gross Domestic Product and $ 400 billion in federal revenue by 2065. She estimated such a plan would cost about $ 60 billion a year.
"Preschool pays off in big ways, experts say"
The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel (Wisconsin), January 11, 2006
And Isabel Sawhill, director of economic studies at the Brookings Institution, a nonprofit Washington-based policy organization, estimated that investment in universal preschool would increase the gross domestic product by $988 billion within 60 years. It is not an easy sell for politicians, she noted, because the initial investment is relatively high and it takes years to reap the benefits.
"The Need to Invest in Young Children"
The New York Times, January 11, 2006
^ Back to top
2005 - In the News
Past estimates suggested that requiring welfare recipients to work would be financially burdensome on states, but Ron Haskins, a welfare expert at the centrist Brookings Institution, said that those have been proved incorrect.
"I would be wary of projections that say in order to increase work in welfare it's going to cost a lot more money," he said. In addition, he noted, welfare rolls have declined sharply since 1997 while TANF funding has remained steady. That has left states with extra money for their welfare programs, Haskins contends.
Ron Haskins "Welfare Rewrite Finds a Home in Budget Bill; States Would Face New Rules"
Congressional Quarterly, December 20, 2005
To say that there is a consensus within the research community regarding the importance of family structure in predicting financial wellbeing would be an understatement. As Ron Haskins of the Brookings Institution testified at a recent Senate Appropriations Committee hearing on MDAs, "If the single most potent antidote to poverty is work, marriage is not far behind ... Marriage itself makes actions that limit hardship — better budgeting, planning, pulling together in a crisis — more common."
Ron Haskins
"Breaking the cycle; Savings bill would bolster D.C. families"
The Washington Times, December 5, 2005
But according to Roland Warren, president of the fatherhood initiative, there is an enormous backlash against marriage in the black community. When his 22-year-old son got married, Warren said, the son's friends were appalled. Ron Haskins, a senior scholar at the Brookings Institution, agrees. "Marriage among blacks is plummeting. It's a disappearing institution in the black community."
Ron Haskins
"Marriage Needs Help; Yet Political Differences Have Thwarted Attempts to Boost Matrimony"
Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, November 27, 2005
Christianity, Judaism and Islam all honour human rights, the Earth's resources and the well-being of children. For decades, scholars have debated how those shared tenets should apply to tomorrow. Practically speaking, supporting future generations can have a selfish twist, at least in the short term. Children eventually will carry the responsibility for aging adults, said Isabel Sawhill, a vice-president of the Brookings Institution and co-director of its Center on Children and Families. But the responsibility rolls both ways. Sawhill said grown-ups must ensure that children have the skills and knowledge to become productive adults themselves.
Isabel Sawhill
"Our debt to future generations"
The Leader-Post (Regina, Saskatchewan), November 26, 2005 Saturday
Promoting marriage also will be good for the nation economically, said Brookings Institution scholar Ron Haskins.
"There are only two ways known to man and God to reduce poverty: No. 1 is work and No. 2 is marriage," he said.
With welfare reform, single mothers have seen their earnings rise, and if the nation could achieve the marriage rate of 1980, "we could reduce child poverty by almost 30 percent," Mr. Haskins said.
Ron Haskins
"Fathers' role in rearing called key; Poll results indicate strong support for healthy-marriage initiatives"
The Washington Times, November 18, 2005
Inevitably, the brunt of these negative trends is borne by children: Had family structure remained unchanged from 1970 to 1998, Adam Thomas and Isabel Sawhill recently argued, the child poverty rate would have been 13.9 percent, rather than 18.3 percent. That sounds like a small difference, but over decades it represents millions of lives unscarred by poverty, and millions of children more likely to become productive, law-abiding citizens.
Isabel Sawhill
"The Party of Sam's Club; Isn't it time the Republicans did something for their voters?"
The Weekly Standard, November 14, 2005
Welfare-reform legislation restricted program benefits and imposed tougher work requirements. Mr. Samuelson cited a Brookings Institution study that showed the share of never-married working mothers rose from 46 percent in 1994 to 66 percent in 2002.
The Brookings report by senior fellow Ron Haskins also found that the number of families receiving traditional welfare fell from 5 million in 1994 to 2 million in 2003. Mr. Haskins said he obtained the data from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics.
"There has been an enormous increase in females with families in the workplace. These women are disproportionately black, never-married, and low-income. These are the types of moms who used to be on welfare. But they've gotten jobs in droves," he said, adding: "This is a trend: one of the most remarkable trends in the history of labor force statistics."
Ron Haskins
"Immigration, poverty linked"
The Washington Times, November 6, 2005
JOHN DIMSDALE reporting: Facing higher bills for Iraq, hurricane reconstruction, avian flu and tax cut extensions, Congress is looking for savings in two of the most costly government programs: Medicare and Medicaid. Why cut there? The same reason Willie Sutton robbed banks. That's where the money is, says Brookings Institution vice president, Isabel Sawhill.
Ms. ISABEL SAWHILL (Brookings Institution): The Willie Sutton principle is certainly operating here. These are the most rapidly growing programs in the federal budget, so it's natural for Congress to look for savings in these large areas.
DIMSDALE: Cuts are proposed in programs for the handicapped and poor children and the program that reimburses the elderly for prescription drugs. Sawhill says Congress has lost its perspective.
Ms. SAWHILL: At the same time that we're trying to find 30-some billion dollars in savings from entitlement programs, we are planning to cut taxes by $70 billion, so somehow or other, the bigger picture has been missed, and the bigger picture is that the Congress is in the process of making the deficit worse, not better.
Isabel Sawhill
"Congress looking to make cuts in Medicare and Medicaid"
Marketplace, October 25, 2005
But the overall poverty rate is misleading. True, poverty has been stuck for non-Hispanic whites, though it's fairly low. Since the late 1970s, it's generally fluctuated between 8 percent and 9 percent, depending on the economy. But poverty among blacks — though still appallingly high — has declined sharply. In 2004 it was 24.7 percent, down from 33.1 percent in 1993, though up from 22.5 percent in 2000. As recently as 1983, it was 35.7 percent.
The dramatic improvement may reflect the 1990s' economic boom. Or it could stem from the 1996 welfare reform, which restricted benefits and imposed tougher work requirements. Job-holding among single mothers has increased significantly. Ron Haskins of the Brookings Institution reports that the share of never-married mothers working rose from 46 percent to 66 percent from 1994 to 2002. The number of families receiving traditional welfare dropped from 5 million in 1994 to 2 million in 2003.
Ron Haskins
"Discovering Poverty (Again)"
The Washington Post, September 21, 2005
Isabel Sawhill, a poverty specialist at the Brookings Institute, said it's unclear how much of the reconstruction money will go to the poor and whether the policies will work. Much of it sounds like a rehash of 1980s ideas that "haven't been very effective, said Sawhill, who also wonders where all the land is coming from for housing and why it hasn't been used before. "Putting houses on federal land seems like Alice in Wonderland to me. Lack of land has never been the problem."
"It's lack of assets to get a mortgage and pay the upkeep. You need a regular job and geographical stability." The percentage of Americans living in poverty grew in 2004 from 12.5 per cent to 12.7 per cent last year, the fourth straight year it's risen. Social activists hope the spotlight Katrina shone on the issue will spark a national debate and a shift in priorities. "The broader long-term picture should be focused on all low-income people," said Sawhill, "not just those who got caught in a storm."
Isabel Sawhill
"Bush's apparent embrace of strong state role in Katrina recovery doubted"
Canadian Press NewsWire, September 16, 2005
Ms. ISABEL SAWHILL (The Brookings Institution): This is an administration that very much likes to use lower taxes as an incentive for economic activity.
DIMSDALE: Isabel Sawhill, at The Brookings Institution, has studied so-called enterprise zones. In addition to tax incentives, companies in the zone can take advantage of lower business fees and easier regulations, but Sawhill says these incentives aren't necessarily the main attraction for employers.
Ms. SAWHILL: The reasons they choose to locate someplace have much more to do with the quality of the labor force, the quality of the physical infrastructure, the friendliness of the local government, various utility costs and things of that sort rather than just tax incentives.
DIMSDALE: Sawhill says better to spend the government's money on schools and sewers and power plants. Details of the president's Gulf opportunity zones remain sketchy. One official likened them to the Lower Manhattan redevelopment zones set up after 9/11, but questions remain whether what worked for a few city blocks will work over three states, dozens of counties and hundreds of local jurisdictions.
Isabel Sawhill
"President Bush saying the government will have to cut unnecessary spending to help fund Hurricane Katrina"
Marketplace, September 16, 2005
Isabel V. Sawhill, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution, acknowledges that to the extent the government spends money on flood insurance, there is less money available for other needs.
"It has become a governmental responsibility that is letting people make choices they might not make if they didn't have the insurance," she said. "When you don't have to bear the cost of something, you may make decisions that you otherwise wouldn't make, because the cost is being borne by a third party."
Isabel Sawhill
"Flirting with disaster; Waterfront: Experts say Hurricane Katrina should make Americans think twice about encouraging development in dangerous areas."
The Baltimore Sun, September 11, 2005
The poverty rate climbed in 2004 to 12.7 percent, from 12.5 percent in 2003 — the fourth year in a row that poverty has risen. The increase was borne completely by non-Hispanic whites, the only ethnic group that saw its poverty rate rise. The percentage of whites in poverty rose from 8.2 percent in 2003 to 8.6 percent. African Americans saw no change in their poverty rate, which remained at 24.7 percent. The poverty rate for Hispanics remained at 21.9 percent, while Asian Americans' poverty levels dropped by two percentage points, to 9.8 percent.
The Midwest was the only region that saw both the poverty rate rise and median household income fall, a "double whammy," said Ron Haskins, a welfare economist at the Brookings Institution.
Ron Haskins
"Poverty Rate Continues to Climb"
The Washington Post, August 31, 2005
Regionally, the Northeast and the West had the highest median incomes, with $47,994 and $47,680, respectively, followed by the Midwest with $44,657 and the South with $40,773.
But the Midwest was the only region to experience the "double whammy" of declining income and rising poverty — probably because of manufacturing losses, said Brookings Institution scholar Ron Haskins.
Ron Haskins
"Poverty rising in U.S., census report finds"
The Washington Times, August 31, 2005
The national poverty rate crept to 12.7 percent from 12.5 percent, despite growing employment and a robust economy in 2004, according to the report. It was the fourth consecutive annual increase.
"Three years after a recession we're still having trouble getting into a recovery," said Ron Haskins, a Republican analyst at the the liberal-leaning Brookings Institution in Washington. "I would have expected poverty to go down."
Ron Haskins
"Houston's poverty rate dropped in '04; But the city and the U.S. haven't fully bounced back from the recession"
The Houston Chronicle, August 31, 2005
In 2004, 37 million Americans lived in poverty; that's despite last year's economic growth that helped create more than two million jobs. Ron Haskins is with The Brookings Institution.
Mr. RON HASKINS (The Brookings Institution): I think the biggest story behind the number is that there are lingering effects of the 2001 recession. And employment and earnings have not completely recovered, and therefore, poverty still has not begun to decline again.
WICAI: Officials at the Census Bureau say the fact we're still talking about the 2001 recession falls in line with past trends. Poverty continued to rise for about three years after the official end of the recession in the '90s.
Ron Haskins
"US Census Bureau releases poverty report"
Marketplace, August 30, 2005
House Republicans have signaled their willingness to go the reconciliation route. They may pursue that course even if the Senate does not, expecting to prevail in a conference.
Ron Haskins, a former White House welfare adviser and now resident scholar at the Brookings Institution, said House Republicans might have to agree to a bigger increase in child care funding than they would like if Snowe can show she has enough GOP allies in the Senate to force a significant increase.
"There is going to have be a compromise on the child care because I doubt the Senate is going to capitulate on that issue," Haskins predicted. "Putting it on reconciliation is a great strategy and the Democrats would not be able to stop it, but the [Senate] Republicans could stop it."
Ron Haskins
"Rewrite of 1996 Welfare Law May Migrate to Budget Reconciliation Package"
Congressional Quarterly Today, August 19, 2005
"The sun may be shining for now, but there are a lot of dark clouds on the horizon. The long-term budget picture is bad and getting worse."
Isabel Sawhill on the CBO's new budget report
Los Angeles Times, August 16, 2005
Medicaid and the related Children's Health Insurance Program covered an average of 46.8 million Americans a day in 2004, up more than 13 million from when welfare reform passed in 1997. The program covered 61 million people at some time during 2004, nearly 20 million more than in 1997.
Without saying so directly, the Republican-controlled Congress has retooled Medicaid from a program that helps mostly the poor and disabled into one that tackles the issue of working Americans who don't have health insurance.
"This is not a mistake. It was the explicit intent of Congress to expand coverage to working families," says Ron Haskins, co-author of the book Welfare Reform and Beyond. "The original sin of social policy was tying Medicaid directly to welfare. Now, it's tied to working."
Ron Haskins
"Welfare reform opens Medicaid to millions"
USA TODAY, August 2, 2005
Critics charge that abstinence-only classes malign condom use and dangerously assume that teens will honor their pledges not to have sex. "The battle lines are drawn on this issue as much as anything else I'm familiar with," said Ron Haskins, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution and a member of an advisory board for the study. "There are really strong, strong feelings on both sides."
Ron Haskins
"Abstinence youths take the pledge"
The Times Union (Albany, New York), June 19, 2005
"I can tell you this: When you survey kindergarten teachers, this is the dimension they point to the most often. It's as if they were to say, 'Give us a kid who will behave, pay attention, sit in the seat, not cause trouble and we can teach him to read and write,' " said Ron Haskins of the Brookings Institution. But if children have behavioral problems, "not only will they learn less, but other kids in the classroom learn less, too."
Ron Haskins
"Head Start fails nearly half of study's 30 measurements"
The Washington Times, June 10, 2005
Campaign leaders and members of Congress yesterday credited parents, teens, schools, communities, religious groups, policy-makers and the press for reducing the pregnancy rate — a feat that was not expected, said Isabel Sawhill, campaign president and Brookings Institution scholar. When the campaign was launched in 1996 with a goal of reducing teen pregnancy by a third in 10 years, "many people said you'll never be able to do that. ...It's too ambitious a goal," Mrs. Sawhill said. She said four out of 10 girls who were teenagers in 1996 would become pregnant at some point before turning 20. Today, the number is three out of 10, and if the campaign's goal is achieved in 2015, two out of 10 will become pregnant as a teen, she said.
Isabel Sawhill
"Teen pregnancy dips by a third in 1990s"
The Washington Times, May 25, 2005
Mr. Ron Haskins (The Brookings Institution): The quality in the individual classroom that each child receives—that is the key.
Rachel Jones (NPR News): Ron Haskins is a senior fellow at The Brookings Institution in Washington. He says the federal government already spends $25 billion on early care and education. Haskins estimates it would cost more than double that to provide universal early education, and he's not sure spending more money will mean better child care.
Haskins: I think that there would be a large number of states and a large number of localities that the programs would not be of sufficient quality to produce the kind of benefits that are shown in this report.
Jones: Haskins believes the more realistic approach to quality early education is for states to keep developing their own policies. For example, Massachusetts just passed legislation that would require all lead teachers in prekindergarten classrooms to have bachelor's degrees by 2008. Rachel Jones, NPR News, Washington.
Ron Haskins
"New study shows benefits of early childhood education"
National Public Radio, April 18, 2005
Rates of youth violence and teen pregnancy especially are still high compared with other industrialized countries, and the increase in single-parent households, while growing slower than it did in previous decades, is still a concern, said Ron Haskins, senior fellow at the Brookings Institution. But those elements of child well-being pale in comparison, he said. "Of all the things measured in this survey, the one most damaging for children is obesity," Haskins said. "Kids who are overweight have lots of associated problems. They're more likely to be teased, get less exercise, their subjective ratings of well-being are lower."
Ron Haskins
"Obesity a drag on child-wellbeing, offsets safety gains"
CBS Market Watch, March 30, 2005
"Last year, before welfare reform died in the Senate, a committee added $1 billion in child-care funds and the full Senate voted to boost it by $6 billion more. This year, 'I think you should cut a deal,' Brookings Institution scholar Ron Haskins told the House welfare hearing. The Bush administration has pledged to cut spending and although it has proposed to keep welfare funding at its record-high level of $16.5 billion annually, budget-cutters know that welfare rolls have plummeted by more than 60 percent, Mr. Haskins said. That money is 'dangling out there,' he warned, suggesting that Republicans compromise on their proposals on work rules and state flexibility and Democrats compromise on their demands for child-care funding so they can get a new law passed."
Ron Haskins, WR&B, The Brookings Institution
"Child care crux of welfare debate"
The Washington Times, February 13, 2005
"One day after President George W. Bush presented the most austere budget of his presidency, advocates for the poor were working hard to paint him as a Robin Hood in reverse - a president who robs the needy to give to the rich. Margy Waller, a specialist on poverty at the Brookings Institution, said the cuts could take a heavy toll. 'This budget is at least as bad and probably worse than the Reagan budgets of the 1980s in terms of its impact on the poor,' she said, referring to President Ronald Reagan's efforts to bring the budget back into balance after a large tax cut."
Margy Waller, WR&B, The Brookings Institution
"President accused of robbing poor to benefit the rich"
Financial Times (London, England), February 9, 2005
"Nationwide, some feel Head Start should focus more on academics and less on its social, family and health components. Others believe Head Start already is very strong academically and would suffer if some of the other goals are scrapped. Such points of contention have led to a stalemate, holding up the reauthorization of the Head Start laws. 'We don't have the same kind of need for comprehensive services as we did, so we ought to focus more on the education part of the program,' said Ron Haskins, a senior fellow in economic studies at the Brookings Institution and an expert in early childhood education. Haskins argues that Head Start should not be thrown out, but improved upon, and he says that requires better coordination with other early childhood programs."
Ron Haskins, WR&B, The Brookings Institution
"As renewal is sought in Milwaukee, debate leaves program's future uncertain"
The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, February 7, 2005
"Isabel Sawhill, director of economic studies for the Brookings Institution, said she heard nothing new about reducing the government deficit, now at a record $427 billion. 'I was struck by his theme of wanting to leave a better world for our children, and ignoring that you can't do that if you're passing on all this debt,' she said."
Isabel Sawhill, WR&B, The Brookings Institution
"State of the Union: Doing the Math; Domestic, Foreign Agenda Run Counter to Fiscal Goals"
Los Angeles Times, February 3, 2005
"Senate Budget Chairman Judd Gregg, R-N.H., said entitlement spending should be on the table this year as lawmakers look for ways to reduce the deficit. However, experts say lawmakers are more likely to start small when tackling entitlements. 'They [lawmakers] are probably not going to get it out of Medicare. . . . They may be able to get a little out of Social Security, but I doubt it,' said Ron Haskins, a former GOP House staffer who is now resident scholar at the Brookings Institution. 'What will be on the table is Temporary Assistance for Needy Families, Supplement Security Income, even child support enforcement administration money. That could easily happen.' Haskins said even a reduction of $40 billion over the next five years in the House Ways and Means Committee budget allocation could have tremendous consequences for smaller programs."
Ron Haskins, WR&B, The Brookings Institution
"Entitlement Programs Are Prime Candidates for Cuts in Fiscal 2006 Budget"
Congressional Quarterly Today, January 31, 2005
"Why this is so is neatly summed up by Ron Haskins, a consultant to the Casey Foundation and a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution, a leading Washington think tank. Haskins says teen births, overwhelmingly out-of-wedlock, clearly have a negative impact on the prospects of young mothers. "It reduces their education, thereby increasing the chances that they will live in poverty," he said. "And it decreases the chances that they will marry. And the two ways out of poverty are work and marriage." Indeed, in congressional testimony last year and in a Brookings report in 2003, Haskins used census data showing that the poor were only half as likely to be married as those who were not poor. "In part this reflects higher marriage rates among the better educated or more skilled and in part it reflects the fact that such families increasingly have two earners, lifting them out of poverty whatever the size of their individual paycheck," he wrote in the report co-authored with fellow researcher Isabel Sawhill."
Ron Haskins, WR&B, The Brookings Institution
"Poverty, teen births in 'overlooked' link; Effect: The decade-long decline in girls having babies is seen as having a 'significant, positive impact' on the poor."
The Baltimore Sun, January 6, 2005
"Poverty rates follow the marriage rates. And so experts see more than a marriage tradition being lost. They fear a generation of children is losing a chance at a good life. The surest indicator of poverty is the single-parent family, said Ron Haskins, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution. Married people live better and longer and generally have more resources to share with their kids, he said. The children of single parents, meanwhile, are more likely to do poorly in school, exhibit behavior problems and become single parents themselves."
Ron Haskins, WR&B, The Brookings Institution
"THE PRICE OF POVERTY 'Culture of marriage' disappearing; Poverty linked to high single-parent rates"
Plain Dealer (Cleveland), January 2, 2005
^ Back to top
2004 - In the News
"In addition, many of these families receive support through various transportation programs, two additional tax credits, several housing programs, and a blizzard of education and training programs. Most of these programs have been expanded or created since the late 1980s. I mention this extensive list of programs both because they demonstrate the nation's substantial commitment to helping poor and low-income families that work and because they provide essential context for considering the question of how much more taxpayers should be expected to spend on these families."
Ron Haskins, WR&B, The Brookings Institution
"The Truth and Consequences of Welfare Reform"
Slate Magazine, November 15, 2004
"When poverty is rising and a recession cuts employment, welfare is supposed to be a safety net that catches poor families. Making matters even worse than these reports suggest, the formula for drawing the poverty line is out of date. For lots of working parents - especially single mothers - child care is an expensive necessity. If our poverty measure reflected the cost of child care, 1.9 million additional people would be poor."
Margy Waller, WR&B, The Brookings Institution
"Welfare Reform: Plenty of Work Left"
Philadelphia Daily News, November 2, 2004
"The level is lower than the average of the '80s or the '90s, and it's much lower than it was in 1993, when poverty began a very sustained decline, in fact, the first sustained decline since the early 1970s."
Ron Haskins, WR&B, The Brookings Institution
"Preview of Tonight's Debate"
CNN News, October 13, 2004
"Kerry has proposed major increases in spending, not just on education but also ... for health care," said Isabel V. Sawhill, director of economic studies at the Brookings Institution and a former Clinton administration official. "My guess is that both of those price tags are on the low side." With his tax increase and added spending, she said, "Let's give the senator the benefit of the doubt here and assume that's more or less a wash. It still doesn't contribute to deficit reduction."
Isabel Sawhill, WR&B, The Brookings Institution
"The Other Planet, Poverty in America"
The Economist Global Agenda, August 30, 2004
"For the third year in a row, the news was basically not good," said Ron Haskins, a former senior Republican congressional staff member now with the Brookings Institution in Washington. "It's reasonable to think income and poverty will improve some in 2004, but they didn't last year."
Ron Haskins, WR&B, The Brookings Institution
"Poor and Uninsured Americans Increase for Third Straight Year"
Los Angeles Times, August 27, 2004
"It's disappointing... seeing very little in the way of policy that really addresses turning [poverty] around," says Margy Waller of the Brookings Institution who served as a Clinton policy adviser. While the Bush administration has said it wants to change the focus on welfare reform to emphasize the well-being of children, she says, in reality "we're seeing reductions" and plans that undermine the safety net.
Margy Waller, WR&B, The Brookings Institution
"More Grist for Campaigns: Poverty in America Rises"
The Christian Science Monitor, August 27, 2004
As the nation's job market shows signs of tightening, Republicans and Democrats remain deadlocked over how to reauthorize the country's largest federal jobs-training program. Both chambers have passed bills (S 1627, HR 1261) to extend a 1998 law (PL 105-220) that consolidated more than 60 federal jobs-training programs into a system of block grants paid to local governments. Finding middle ground and passing the bill, said Margy Waller, an author of the Brookings paper and an expert on low-income workforce policy, could work to both parties' political advantage. "At a minimum you'd have a signing ceremony that would convey a message of concern for people losing their jobs, those who are unemployed," she said. "But stumbling blocks over block grants and faith-based initiatives seem to be more important than moving the bill along."
Margy Waller, WR&B, The Brookings Institution
"Job Training Bill Snagged Over State-Level Block Grants, Faith-Based Charities"
Congressional Quarterly Today, August 13, 2004
Ron Haskins, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution and the welfare staff director of the House of Representatives Ways and Means Committee when the 1996 welfare law was enacted, said that, while it is true some people are worse off under the new system, many former welfare recipients are faring much better. He said that, on average, a family of one parent and two children that makes it off welfare and into work earns about $15,000 to $16,000 a year, including income from earnings, food stamps and the earned income tax credit that provides tax relief to low-income workers. That's nearly double the $8,000 to $9,000 a year a family on cash benefits and food stamps receives. "Overall, it's been a very positive picture," Haskins said.
Ron Haskins, WR&B, The Brookings Institution
"U.S. Women Welfare Series: Law Drops Moms in Deeper Poverty"
Inter Press Service, August 10, 2004
"Middle-class programs are obviously more popular politically, but if kids fall behind early, they'll never catch up."
Isabel Sawhill, WR&B, The Brookings Institution
"Kerry's Battle Plan"
Business Week, August 9, 2004
"It should not be surprising that no one wants to talk about these [issues] in the middle of an election year, but that is what is going to be badly needed once this election is over," said Isabel V. Sawhill, a former Clinton administration official who directs economics studies at the Brookings Institution think tank in Washington. " ... Neither [candidate] has a plan for what to do after four years, when the problem gets much, much worse."
Isabel Sawhill, WR&B, The Brookings Institution
"The Democratic Convention; Major Fiscal Worries Not on Anyone's Agenda"
Los Angeles Times, July 27, 2004
"It is time to recognize that a dollar invested in the young is more likely to affect future productivity and the strength of the nation than a dollar provided to a senior citizen. Both parties, of late, have been unwilling to tamper in any serious way with Social Security or Medicare. These programs have been a huge success, but the trade-offs have to be faced, especially in light of the looming retirement of the baby boom generation."
Isabel Sawhill, WR&B, The Brookings Institution
"Reducing Deficit is Difficult but Doable"
The Times Union, July 25, 2004
Kerry's pledge to keep all his new spending proposals within the amount raised by rolling back tax cuts for the wealthy "only keeps things from getting a lot worse," said Isabel V. Sawhill, a Brookings Institution budget expert. "The Bush administration doesn't look any better," Sawhill said, because it wants to make the tax cuts permanent beyond their expiration at the end of the decade.
Isabel Sawhill, WR&B, The Brookings Institution
"Bush, Kerry Present Starkly Different Solutions on Health Care"
The Hartford Courant, July 19, 2004
"If [teenagers] were told, 'You're not going to be supported by the government to raise your children, you're going to have to have a job, you're going to have to work and welfare is going to be a time-limited source of assistance to you'. . . that would cause many of them to rethink whether or not it's desirable to have a baby early."
Isabel Sawhill, WR&B, The Brookings Institution
"Welfare Reform Which Includes a Focus on Would-Be Fathers"
National Public Radio, Weekend All Things Considered, June 26, 2004
Still, even those who push above a poverty-level wage can fall into a trap. Between $7 to $10 an hour, they make just enough to start losing what little safety net there is, says Ron Haskins, a former Republican staffer who helped spearhead the 1996 welfare reform, now a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution. They often become ineligible for food stamps or child care assistance, and the earned income tax credit starts phasing out for a single parent at $13,370. "For them, Horatio Alger does not apply," says Haskins.
Ron Haskins, WR&B, The Brookings Institution
"Working. . . And Poor"
BusinessWeek, May 31, 2004
House leaders seem poised to oppose another of the three-month extensions that keep money flowing to states - unless the senators also accept the president's marriage proposal. But before they go there, moderate members on both sides of the aisle should play matchmaker by recommending a multi-year reauthorization of the current [welfare] law. Congress simply isn't going to resolve the current differences this election year. Working families shouldn't suffer the consequences.
Margy Waller, WR&B, The Brookings Institution
Misunderestimating the Welfare Debate
Philadelphia Daily News, May 12, 2004
The provision passed by this committee as part of welfare reform reauthorization would provide the funding, direction, and federal leadership necessary to move the nation in this direction. If the program is enacted and projects are initiated all across the country, a great deal of attention and energy will be focused on marriage as a vital national issue. Equally important, good programs carefully evaluated will inevitably increase our knowledge of what works. There is no issue on the nation's domestic agenda that holds greater promise to substantially reduce the nation's major social problems.
Ron Haskins, WR&B, The Brookings Institution
Federal Programs to Promote Marriage
Social Security and Family Policy Subcommittee, Committee on Finance, United States Senate, May 5, 2004
"[The proposal to allow eight eligible states to manage Head Start programs] represents a reasonable compromise between those who are concerned that the quality and even existence of Head Start would be jeopardized by turning responsibility for the program over to states, and those who believe that states can improve preparation for school through increased coordination and accountability. Given the immensity of the task and the modest success achieved thus far, new ideas are worth trying."
Ron Haskins, WR&B, The Brookings Institution
"A Head Start for Poor Children?"
Heritage Foundation Backgrounder, May 4, 2004
The wait [on welfare reform reauthorization] has meant uncertainty for states, local jurisdictions and groups charged with providing services for the poor. Isabel Sawhill . . . said the status quo "keeps the money flowing and keeps the law as it was initially enacted. But it doesn't really tell anyone what it might look like going out a couple of years, especially if states are trying to modify their systems in ways that will help the working poor, or enable (states) to deal more effectively with some of the hard-to-serve cases. They are handicapped in not knowing what kind of resources they are going to have and under what set of rules."
Isabel Sawhill, WR&B, The Brookings Institution
"Politics Trumps the Poor"
Dayton Daily News (OH), April 12, 2004
"Republicans would like to re-authorize [welfare reform] so that states can continue spending money over the next five years, and they would also like to do several additional things, three are notable. They would like to have money to fund states and private organizations including faith-based organizations to promote healthy marriage. The second thing is that they would like to strengthen the work requirements in the bill. . . . And the third thing is that the Republicans would like to give the states more authority to increase efficiency across the program, something called a super-waiver."
Ron Haskins, WR&B, The Brookings Institution
"Ron Haskins discusses the current debate in the Senate over a Welfare Bill"
National Public Radio, Morning Edition, April 2, 2004
"If the welfare law is not reauthorized this year, there will be more pressure to cut spending on the program next year." The main welfare program, Temporary Assistance for Needy Families, has been providing the same amount, $16.5 billion a year, since 1996, even though the number of people receiving cash assistance has dropped 60 percent, to 4.9 million.
Ron Haskins, WR&B, The Brookings Institution
"Senate, Torn by Minimum Wage, Shelves Major Welfare Bill"
The New York Times, April 2, 2004
"I don't have a problem with a few experiments to see what can be accomplished through education and counseling," said Isabel Sawhill . . . . "I'm a little skeptical about the wisdom of putting a lot of resources into the area before we see what works."
[Sawhill] has written many briefs on the subject of welfare reform and co-authored "Work and Marriage: The Way to End Poverty and Welfare.". . . A sticking point for her is the lack of conclusive studies showing that marriage workshops necessarily help.
"We don't know if they work," she said. "We have had some modest success with middle-class couples, but we don't know if that's transferable to people of low-income communities."
Isabel V. Sawhill, WR&B, The Brookings Institution
"Plan Would Fund Counseling for Low-Income Couples"
Contra-Costa Times (CA), March 14, 2004
"Not only does behavior matter," [writes] Isabel Sawhill . . . "it matters more than it used to. Growing gaps between the rich and poor in recent decades have been exacerbated by a divergence in the behavior of the two groups" . . . . Sawhill's research indicates that we could double the amount we spend on welfare programs, and we would not make an important dent in poverty. But if we could somehow give people the inner resources they need to hold onto a job, and bring illegitimacy rates back to 1970 levels, then poverty rates would plummet.
Isabel Sawhill, WR&B, The Brookings Institution
"More Than Money" (Op-ed)
The New York Times, March 2, 2004
Bush may claim that growth is the key to reducing the deficit, and that lower tax rates are the key to growth. But even if one factors a reasonable recovery into the calculations, combined with Bush's desire to make tax cuts permanent and realistic projections of federal spending programs, our recent Brookings study suggests deficits will remain around 3.5 percent of GDP over the next decade and deteriorating thereafter as the baby boomers retire.
Isabel Sawhill (WR&B), Lael Brainard, & Michael O'Hanlon, The Brookings Institution
"Bush on Road to Bad Economic Health" (Op-ed by Sawhill, Brainard, & O'Hanlon)
The Times Union (Albany, NY), February 23, 2004
The money doesn't go as far as it used to because of inflation, said Margy Waller, an economics expert at the Brookings Institution in Washington. The recent economic downturn forced state and local governments to rely more on federal grants, she said, making it crucial that those grants increase. . . . "Unless you adjust for inflation from year to year, it means a cut," Ms. Waller said.
Margy Waller, WR&B, The Brookings Institution
"Treading Water Not Enough for Block Grants"
The Standard-Times (New Bedford, MA), February 17, 2004
PRESIDENT Clinton shared a few ideas about how to next proceed on welfare reform just before he left office in 2001. His thoughts are worth reviewing as the Senate prepares to take up reauthorization of the historic 1996 welfare law....He identified five issues...: Helping the "hard to place" to find work, job-training, transportation, addressing the needs of places with a disproportionate concentration of recipients and reducing recidivism.
Margy Waller, WR&B, The Brookings Institution
"Heeding Clinton's Welfare Advice" (Op-Ed by Margy Waller)
Philadelphia Daily News, February 6, 2004
President Bush unveiled his $2.4 trillion budget proposal today, numbers that are expected to project a $521 billion deficit for this year. Isabel Sawhill, vice president and director of economic studies at the Brookings Institution, was online to discuss the budget [see transcript].
Isabel Sawhill, WR&B, The Brookings Institution
"Bush's Budget" (online chat with Isabel Sawhill)
The Washington Post, February 2, 2004
"You can't get to balance from where we are without new revenues," says Brookings economist Isabel Sawhill, coeditor of a new study laying out real deficit-reducing options. "But that doesn't mean you shouldn't make cuts in spending. If done the right way, they would actually make government more effective."
Isabel Sawhill, WR&B, The Brookings Institution
"Too Far to Grow"
U.S. News & World Report, February 2, 2004
[The CBO has forecast the deficit] to narrow to around 1.8 percent of GDP . . . in the fiscal year 2009. This, however, assumes that . . . the president allows his previous tax cuts to expire as scheduled. . . . "Put in more realistic assumptions and the deficits would be between 3 and 4 percent by 2009," said Isabel Sawhill, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution.
Isabel Sawhill, WR&B, The Brookings Institution
"Skepticism grows over Bush's pledge to slash budget deficit"
The Financial Times, January 28, 2004
Ron Haskins, a former senior Republican House staffer, argues that the fact that "our financial future depends on foreigners" could resonate with the U.S. public, especially since "we are leaving the problem to our children and grandchildren."
Ron Haskins, WR&B, The Brookings Institution
"The Curious Shrinking Dollar"
U.S. News & World Report, January 26, 2004
[Gov.] Pataki has long defended the idea that harsher penalties force [welfare] recipients to become more independent. Yet that connection is still unproven, says Margy Waller, a visiting economics fellow at the Brookings Institution, a Washington think tank. Waller acknowledges that current federal work requirements have had positive results, but said there is scant research to show that rigid requirements lead to better outcomes.
Margy Waller, WR&B, The Brookings Institution
"Pataki's Welfare Plan: More Work, Less Money"
City Limits Weekly, January 26, 2004
The 1996 welfare reform law is the most successful and far-reaching social reform in a half century. It is unfortunate that this successful law has been held in limbo by Congress for two years. Prompt action by Congress this year to renew the law for five more years will ensure that states have the funding they need to continue aggressive implementation of the work requirements and thereby help even more low-income families achieve the self-reliance that comes from work.
Ron Haskins, WR&B, The Brookings Institution
"Compelling Case To Reauthorize Welfare Reform"
Houston Chronicle, January 19, 2004
According to Margy Waller, an expert on family structure and poverty at the Brookings Institution . . . studies prove that preventing teen pregnancy and giving wage subsidies strengthen the marriages of lower-income families. "Should the solution be marriage, or should it be the ability of single parents to earn enough to support their children?" Waller asked.
Margy Waller, WR&B, The Brookings Institution
"As election nears, Bush marriage initiative gets new attention"
The Philadelphia Inquirer, January 17, 2004
"If you are running large deficits, you are really on the knife-edge in terms of maintaining the confidence of domestic and international capital markets," said Isabel V. Sawhill, a former Clinton administration budget official who is now director of economic studies at the Brookings Institution. "We may not have the flexibility we need to (borrow) if an emergency arises, and in this dangerous world you cannot predict when an emergency will arise."
Isabel Sawhill, WR&B, The Brookings Institution
"Defense spending pushes upward, with ramifications for deficit"
Newhouse News Service, January 15, 2004
The [Brookings Budget] report lays out three options for reducing the deficits to zero over [10 years]. . . . All involve tax rises: Isabel Sawhill, one of the report's authors, says "no plan can avoid increasing revenues because they have shrunk so much in recent years."
Isabel Sawhill, WR&B, The Brookings Institution
"Tough budget choices for White House"
The Financial Times, January 13, 2004
^ Back to top
2003 - In the News
Economist Belle Sawhill at the Brookings Institution says that we have "silo" debates, each issue in a separate container. In the 10th year, the Medicare bill will cost $70 billion—just enough to pay for every child initiative on the menu from paid family leave to fully funded Head Start to universal preschool. "I wonder what would have happened if you told the voters this is what you could have bought, which would you prefer?" she asked, and then added, "But voters aren't shown a list of choices."
Isabel Sawhill, WR&B, The Brookings Institution
"Get Old Quick, Kids" (Column)
The Seattle Times, December 5, 2003
The Brookings Institution does an excellent job of bringing together liberals and conservatives, Democrats and Republicans, into bipartisan discussions about welfare and poverty. Going into the 2002 expiration of the landmark 1996 welfare reform law, Brookings did comprehensive work in pulling together research on the good and the bad of welfare policy and practice in preparation for reauthorization. Most of that work—plus later discussions and policy briefs—is available at the site's "Welfare Reform and Beyond" initiative.
"Web Sites On Welfare"
The National Journal, December 5, 2003
Ron Haskins, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution, said the latest effort by those seeking to transform Head Start could have a subtle, lasting effect. "If you can trash the old system, then people are more willing to try something new," Mr. Haskins said. "That's an absolutely standard political practice."
"The welfare queen," he added, "played a role in welfare reform from beginning to end."
Ron Haskins, WR&B, The Brookings Institution
"Republicans Urge Inquiry On Head Start"
The New York Times, November 26, 2003
[A]uthors Ron Haskins and Isabel Sawhill dramatically show that more work and more marriage are the two main factors distinguishing those who get out of poverty from those who stay mired in it. . . .
By themselves, reducing the number of children in poor families and increasing the percentage of heads of household who finish high school have far less impact than increasing work hours and marriage rates.
Most arresting: the combined effects of increasing work hours, marriage rates and education and reducing children per family—cutting poverty rates by more than 60 percent. . . . The numbers speak.
Ron Haskins and Isabel Sawhill, WR&B, The Brookings Institution
"Cut Poverty by Changing Behavior" (Column)
The Oregonian, October 18, 2003
From 1965 to 1995, notes Ron Haskins of the Brookings Institution, the federal and state governments increased their means-tested spending, adjusted for inflation, by a multiple of seven. Yet child poverty increased. After the mid-1990s, when state and federal programs switched their emphasis from writing checks to encouraging work, welfare caseloads fell by a stunning 60 percent, an unprecedented number of single mothers found and kept jobs (even through the recent recession), and child poverty dropped—for black children, Haskins says, to its lowest level ever. "I don't think any public policy has ever had this kind of impact," Haskins says.
Now comes a third line of evidence, in a Brookings paper just published by Haskins and his colleague Isabel V. Sawhill.
The strong economy helped, [Sawhill] says, but "we've also got to stop thinking of people as passive victims of the economy and whatever the social safety net provides. Liberals have too often emphasized the income-to-behavior link without also recognizing that there's a behavior-to-income link as well."
"If people did a few things—graduated from high school, got a job, and delayed having a baby until they married - our analysis shows that would eliminate a huge chunk of poverty in this country," says Sawhill, "and that would be far more effective than anything we could feasibly do through the welfare system alone."
"We know we have growing income inequality," Sawhill says, "but there's a lot less focus on another gap that's opening between rich and poor, and that's in the behavioral domain, and it involves both work and marriage." This new gap, she adds,"doesn't bode well for the future of social relations in America."
Isabel Sawhill and Ron Haskins, WR&B, The Brookings Institution
"Forget About Haves and Have-Nots. Think Do's And Do-Nots."
The National Journal, September 20, 2003
If the Senate passes the bill, Head Start funds will go to state governments, which will serve as middlemen between the federal government and local grant receivers. Local institutions receive grants directly from the federal government under the current arrangement.
Proponents of Head Start argue that the program should be left alone for a number of reasons. . . Those who support reform stress that Head Start has not been as successful as its popularity implies.
"Perhaps the best arguments for the Bush proposal are that Head Start does not now achieve the goal of adequately preparing poor and minority children for school," Ron Haskins and Isabel Sawhill, scholars at the Brookings Institution, a think tank based in Washington, D.C., wrote in a July paper.
"National data show unequivocally that poor children as a group are substantially behind their more fortunate peers when they enter schools," the paper says.
Ron Haskins and Isabel Sawhill, WR&B, The Brookings Institution
"Support for Head Start; Backers of program criticize Bush reform plan"
The Record (Bergen County, NJ), September 3, 2003
It wasn't surprising when children entering Head Start in 2000 were among the lowest-scoring 25% of youngsters nationally on vocabulary, early-writing and early-math skills. The federal program is for low-income preschoolers, who often come from unsettled households.
But when school ended nine months later, the Head Start youngsters still were in the lowest quarter nationally—"halfway to average," Brookings Institution social-policy expert Ron Haskins said.
Many nonpartisan and liberal experts, frustrated with Head Start's weak academic showing, think that is worth at least a trial. The proposal has run into a buzz saw of opposition from Head Start operators fearing a loss of control, and from Democrats leery of ceding an education issue to the president.
The complaints have become so fierce that even many Republican legislators "think it's not worth the fight" to promote Mr. Bush's overhaul, said Mr. Haskins, a former Republican Congressional aide on welfare policy. "Head Start is a sacred cow."
Ron Haskins, WR&B, The Brookings Institution
"Head Start Program Gets Low Grade"
Wall Street Journal, September 2, 2003
"When Head Start was founded in 1965, we didn't have Medicaid, we didn't have food stamps, we barely had a school lunch program," said Ron Haskins, a scholar at Brookings Institution and former Bush administration official.
Today, there are many social-service programs and Head Start's services are often redundant. A modernized Head Start should focus on education to ensure that low-income children come to school on equal footing with—instead of behind—other children, Mr. Haskins said.
Ron Haskins, WR&B, The Brookings Institution
"Head Start reforms face serious fight; Bush says program needs updating"
The Washington Times, September 1, 2003
It was a midnight squeaker. By the narrowest possible margin, 217 to 216, on the final night before its August recess, the House of Representatives approved a major change in the Head Start program, the widely popular and generally praised preschool program for needy youngsters.
. . . Rep. Mike Castle of Delaware, the subcommittee chairman, proposed giving as many as eight states with strong preschool programs of their own five years to manage Head Start and see if they can improve its performance.
His approach has been endorsed by two Brookings Institution scholars, Ron Haskins and Isabel Sawhill, with strong credentials as advocates for children and no partisan axes to grind. They recommended a five-state experiment, with a proviso that the participating states agree to cooperate with a stringent independent evaluation of their five-year performance—something the Castle bill also requires.
Isabel Sawhill and Ron Haskins, WR&B, The Brookings Institution
"Honest Look at Head Start" (Column)
The Washington Post, August 03, 2003
One element of the [welfare reform] proposal fueling controversy would require welfare recipients to work 40 hours a week. Current law calls for a 30-hour workweek and 20 hours for those with children under 6.
"Forty hours is more or less a standard American workweek," said Ron Haskins, President Bush's former welfare adviser. "If taxpayers work 40 hours, then people getting benefits from taxpayers should work 40 hours."
Ron Haskins, WR&B, The Brookings Institution
"Welfare reform, part two; Follow-up plan has social service workers concerned"
The Kansas City Star, July 27, 2003
Congress will soon need to wrestle anew with what to do about welfare policy.
Ron Haskins, a fellow at the Brookings Institution who advised the Bush White House on welfare policy in the early years of the administration, noted that "no one wants to vote against welfare reform."
Haskins said he believes the final bill that will reach President Bush's desk, possibly late this fall, "will split the difference" between what eventually emerged from the Senate Finance Committee last year and what the House passed in February.
Ron Haskins, WR&B, The Brookings Institution
"Republicans draft changes to welfare reform law"
The Hill, July 2, 2003
For $60 billion to $76 billion a year in new federal spending—less than 1 percent of this nation's $10 trillion-plus gross domestic product—millions of lower-income children could have better lives. Is that too much to ask, especially in light of the hundreds of billions of dollars worth of tax cuts, including big benefits for the wealthy, and the prospect of hundreds of billions of dollars more for a prescription-drug-coverage bill for seniors?
That's the theme of a session hosted last week by the Brookings Institution, a liberal-leaning Washington think tank, and of a new book edited by Isabel Sawhill, a senior fellow at Brookings.
Call it the 1-percent solution.
The book, One Percent for the Kids: New Policies, Brighter Futures for America's Children, submits various proposals for improving the lot of needy children, from strengthening early education and prenatal programs to giving families with $60,000 or less in income monthly "child allowances."
Isabel Sawhill, WR&B, The Brookings Institution
"For a Relative Budgetary Pittance, Nation's Poorest Children Could Be Helped" (Editorial)
The Columbus Dispatch (Ohio), June 8, 2003
Congress probably will have to pass another temporary extension this month of the 1996 welfare law so the Senate can have more time to consider its reauthorization measure.
Some experts still see a possible compromise before the end of the year.
"Republicans and Democrats and the House and the Senate are not that far apart. The House and the Senate regularly resolve differences much greater than those that stopped last year's reauthorization," wrote Ron Haskins and Paul Offner in a May report for the Brookings Institution.
Haskins, a Brookings senior fellow, was a former welfare adviser to Bush. Offner, a consultant at the Urban Institute, was a former staff member for Finance Committee Democrats.
The two suggest the final bill may contain a 35-hour workweek requirement and maintain the existing law on vocational education requirements.
They also wrote that a compromise over child care funding eventually will lead to a bill that will contain between $2 billion and $3 billion in new money over the next five years.
Ron Haskins, WR&B, The Brookings Institution
"Another Welfare Law Extension Appears Likely"
Congressional Quarterly Daily Monitor, June 2, 2003
"We like to think we're a classless society, it's part of the mythology we have as a country," said Isabel Sawhill, senior fellow in economic studies at the liberal-centrist Brookings Institution. "This is the land of opportunity. But we're not any more the land of opportunity than other industrialized countries."
Isabel Sawhill, WR&B, The Brookings Institution
"Class war defense of tax bill called wrong"
United Press International, May 23, 2003
While grades K through 12 traditionally have received priority in public education, many experts on poverty and child development view preschool as critical.
Isabel Sawhill, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution, said it took some time and reading to convince her that one year of a child's life could have such a large impact decades later.
"If we don't intervene early," Sawhill said, "they fall farther and farther behind."
Isabel Sawhill, WR&B, The Brookings Institution
"Studies Link Pre-K Cuts, Crime"
Newsday, April 28, 2003
Transitional Work Corp [is] a Philadelphia-based nonprofit agency set up by the city and state governments to help the hard to serve.
Ron Haskins, a former congressional aide who helped draft the original welfare reform legislation, and who last year advised the White House on its reauthorization, has visited the Philadelphia program and calls it first-rate. "What I like about that organization is that they work with everybody who comes to them," adds Haskins. "In this whole field of welfare-to-work, programs are notorious for ignoring the bad cases, taking the good, and then claiming credit. These guys take everybody."
And Haskins, who expresses more enthusiasm for the transitional jobs model, says that the programs work because "you have people in actual situations that they would experience on a daily basis in the workplace, where they have to deal with the supervisor and the customer."
Ron Haskins, WR&B, The Brookings Institution
"Help wanted; A costly mix of transitional work, mentoring and training may be the only way to get long-term welfare recipients back to work."
Government Executive, April 2003
Ron Haskins, a Brookings Institution senior fellow who as a Republican congressional staff member was deeply involved in the welfare overhaul, wonders why, in these slow economic times, the increases [in welfare caseloads] haven't been more dramatic.
"A lot of the people who have been critical of welfare reform say the rolls should be going up," Haskins said. "The critics argue that former recipients could be destitute out there. It's possible. But they don't know. We need research, of course."
Ron Haskins, WR&B, The Brookings Institution
"Welfare Rolls Rise in Area as Governments Confront Cuts"
The Washington Post, March 10, 2003
"Almost all of our information is that preschool kids are not harmed" when mothers go to work, said Ron Haskins, a welfare expert at the Brookings Institution and a former congressional aide who helped write the 1996 law.
Haskins was encouraged that mothers were able to find time with their older children, even after they began working. The study found that mothers lost 3.7 hours per day of time with their older children while they were at work, but managed to make up all but 45 minutes of that by cutting back on personal, social and educational activities that did not involve their children.
Ron Haskins, WR&B, The Brookings Institution
"Researchers find welfare-to-work does not harm children"
The Associated Press, March 6, 2003
The conservative proponents who largely drove the passage of the [1996] measure hoped the reforms would promote a work ethic among the poor, foster the development of two-parent families and reduce out-of-wedlock births. These goals were largely accomplished, according to Ron Haskins, a senior fellow in economic studies at the liberal-centrist Brookings Institution and a former senior advisor for welfare policy to the Bush administration.
Haskins said the reforms not only reduced welfare caseloads from 1996 through 2002, but also increased employment among former welfare recipients. In addition, he said that during the same period child poverty in the nation was reduced for the first time since the early 1970s.
"According to current population surveys, there has been a very dramatic increase in employment that is completely unprecedented in the history of the program, especially among never-married mothers," he said.
Haskins added that federal spending on social programs such as child care for the poor increased seven-fold over the last six years, from $50 billion to $350 billion.
"We spend more money now through work support systems than we do through welfare," he said.
Ron Haskins, WR&B, The Brookings Institution
"Debate warms up over welfare reform"
United Press International, March 5, 2003
Andrea Kane, a nonresident fellow at the liberal-centrist Brookings Institution and director of public policy for the National Campaign to Prevent Teen Pregnancy, said that anti-poverty policy in 1990s was driven by a widespread belief among both liberals and conservatives in leveling the playing field for those who work hard and play by the rules.
"If people do their best, there ought to be opportunity to move up the ladder and fulfill the American dream," Kane said during a panel discussion sponsored by the New America Foundation, the Corporation For Enterprise Development, The Hudson Institute, the National Urban League, and Demos, a non-profit advocacy group committed to expanding economic opportunity.
"I think those clichés really do resonate with the American people," she said.
Andrea Kane, WR&B, The Brookings Institution
"Nonpartisan anti-poverty efforts may flag"
United Press International, February 25, 2003
People in both parties acknowledge that the House bill has no chance of becoming law in its current form. "It can't pass on the Senate floor," said Ron Haskins, a welfare expert who worked for the White House last year.
Ron Haskins, WR&B, The Brookings Institution
"Debate over welfare shifts to Senate"
The Associated Press, February 14, 2003
"Offering state block grants in the middle of the most severe state fiscal crisis we've seen in a long time—with little or no new federal aid—almost guarantees that states will either fail to take up the option or that they will use the money in inappropriate ways," Isabel V. Sawhill, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution, said at a gathering of policy analysts held to assess the budget.
Isabel V. Sawhill, WR&B, The Brookings Institution
"Bush Seeks to Recast Federal Ties to the Poor: States Would Gain Control Over Services; Funds for Some Programs Would Be Cut"
The Washington Post, February 9, 2003
Isabel V. Sawhill, a poverty expert at the Brookings Institution, said the 1990s boom did lift all income levels. But, she said, that was because the robust economy came with welfare reform that pushed the poor into the workforce, new federal support for child care and after-school programs, and a major expansion of the earned-income tax credit, which supplemented low wages and made it economically viable to leave welfare.
"Even if I accepted the [administration's] argument about growth, I would say we need some good microeconomic policies to go along with it," Sawhill said.
Isabel V. Sawhill, WR&B, The Brookings Institution
"Bush Plan Keys on Growth To Solve Poverty Problem"
The Washington Post, February 9, 2003
Isabel V. Sawhill, a poverty expert at the Brookings Institution, said the 1990s boom did lift all income levels. But, she said, that was because the robust economy came with welfare reform that pushed the poor into the workforce, new federal support for child care and after-school programs, and a major expansion of the earned-income tax credit, which supplemented low wages and made it economically viable to leave welfare.
"Even if I accepted the [administration's] argument about growth, I would say we need some good microeconomic policies to go along with it," Sawhill said.
Isabel V. Sawhill, WR&B, The Brookings Institution
"Bush Plan Keys on Growth To Solve Poverty Problem"
The Washington Post, February 9, 2003
Ron Haskins, the welfare analyst who helped write the original bill, points out, for example, that while much of the money spent on education to date has indeed produced meager results, other solutions—such as tailoring training programs to specific jobs in specific local markets, possibly with the help of local businesses—have not been tried. These are the kinds of policies that might be stymied if bureaucrats need to spend their time filling out federal forms.
Ron Haskins, WR&B, The Brookings Institution
"Working on Welfare" (editorial)
The Washington Post, January 25, 2003
^ Back to top
2002 - In the News
At the Brookings Institution, senior fellow Isabel V. Sawhill took some comfort from the fact that the poverty rate among children was unchanged last year despite the increase overall. Credit, she said, should probably go to welfare reform, which has moved thousands of women from welfare to work and made their children "better off and less likely to be poor than when they were on welfare."
"Even if I accepted the [administration's] argument about growth, I would say we need some good microeconomic policies to go along with it," Sawhill said.
Isabel V. Sawhill, WR&B, The Brookings Institution
"U.S. Poverty Rate Rises, Income Drops; Increase in Ranks of Poor Is First in 8 Years "
The Washington Post, September 25, 2002
"The problem is not that people aren't getting married, the problem is that they are having babies when they are still too young to either be parents or be married. And I don't think we want to encourage low-income women to marry men who may turn out to be abusive or may have substance abuse problems."
Isabel Sawhill, WR&B, The Brookings Institution
Religion & Ethics NewsweeklyPBS, June 14, 2002
WashingtonPost.com Forum on Welfare Reform with Isabel Sawhill
"Congress is getting ready to reauthorize the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) program. Should the welfare reform legislation passed 1996 be considered a success? What do you think of the Bush Administration's proposal to broaden support for 'faith-based' social programs? What can be done to reduce teen pregnancy and out-of-wedlock births?
"Brookings Institution Senior Fellow Isabel Sawhill was online to take your questions and comments on welfare reform."
Isabel Sawhill, WR&B, The Brookings Institution
WashingonPost.com, June 13, 2002
Transcript
"'If we're going to ask low-income, mainly single moms with children to work more hours, it's essential to provide additional resources so that their kids are cared for,' says Andrea Kane, a welfare expert the Brookings Institution think tank here."
Andrea Kane, WR&B, The Brookings Institution
"Welfare debate shifting focus to improving system"
Hearst Washington Bureau, June 9, 2002
"'It's very clear that the people who care about abstinence have dug in very, very strongly,' said Isabel Sawhill, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution, a Washington-based think tank. 'The people who disagree with it have been coming up with all kinds of creative ways of maybe modifying the language ... but they aren't making much headway as far as I can tell.'
"...Some senators 'have not bought into what the House did on this front,' Sawhill said. Sen. Evan Bayh (D-Ind.) would include $100 million a year over five years for teen pregnancy prevention in his welfare bill. Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.) is a co-sponsor of the Bayh bill."
Isabel Sawhill, WR&B, The Brookings Institution
"Abstinence Provision Threatens Welfare Bill"
Newsday, June 1, 2002
"'We think there is a lot of consensus and merit in keeping a strong focus on work—employment is up and poverty is down,' said Andrea Kane, outreach director of the Brookings Institution's welfare reform policy team, which published the book-length report,
Welfare Reform and Beyond: The Future of the Safety Net.
"'But at the same time, people are working at low-wage, unstable jobs and many with no health insurance,' Kane said. 'There are some concerns about putting too much focus on a relatively small number of parents left on welfare, at the expense of those who already left welfare, and other low income families. Reauthorization has to help people stay off welfare and succeed.'"
Andrea Kane, WR&B, The Brookings Institution
"Report Offers Guidance on Welfare Reform"United Press International, May 17, 2002
"'The fact that the government is talking about marriage as a positive value can make a difference over the long haul,' says Isabel Sawhill of the Brookings Institution, an independent think tank. 'I believe in the bully pulpit effect.'
"...Although Sawhill of the Brookings Institution welcomes the conversation, she doesn't think that focusing on marriage is going 'to solve the problem of poverty of too many children.'
"A more effective governmental response to child poverty, she says, would be a more intense effort to decrease early childbearing. 'Half of unwed childbearing begins in the teenage years. I don't think marriage is the solution for teenagers.'"
Isabel Sawhill, WR&B, The Brookings Institution
"Welfare for wedlock? Plan to bolster marriages brings a mixed reaction"
The Plain Dealer, May 27, 2002
"'The widespread recognition that children don't do well when raised outside marriage is a positive development,' says Isabel Sawhill, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution. 'At the same time, we need to move cautiously in getting government involved in the marriage promotion arena. It would be easy for the whole marriage movement to get out of hand and end up encouraging marriage in situations where it's not the best outcome for everyone.'"
Isabel Sawhill, WR&B, The Brookings Institution
"Dan Quayle's Strange Victory"Salon.com , May 10, 2002
"From the Marketplace Work and Family desk, Stephen Henn reports.
"
[President] Bush: In this country, if you give somebody a chance, they can succeed. It takes a little bit of extra help sometimes and we have to provide that help.
"
Henn: While President Bush was talking about his plans for welfare reform in Chicago, [Isabel] Sawhill at the Brookings Institution says he could have just as easily been talking about the brand new farm bill, which will cost close to $190 billion over the next 10 years.
"
Sawhill: In fact, we are going to be spending more on farmers than we are on welfare recipients—even though both are relatively small groups. We have roughly 2 million farm families in the United States and roughly 2 million welfare families.
"
Henn: If payments to farmers where doled out equally, every single farmer in America could expect to receive $9,500 a year—in contrast, the maximum average welfare payment for a family of three is $4,900 a year. But farmers go crazy when 'ag' subsidies are compared to welfare payments."
Isabel Sawhill, WR&B, The Brookings Institution
Marketplace, May 13, 2002
listen to audio
"Isabel Sawhill, [Ron] Haskins's colleague at the Brookings Institution and president of the National Campaign to Prevent Teen Pregnancy, doesn't dispute the demonstrable benefits for children of having married parents, but thinks that the failure to marry is not the problem. She notes that 90 percent of American women are married by the age of 45, but women in their mid-twenties are more likely to have children than to be married—so Sawhill believes that the problem that must be addressed is early childbearing. Rather than encourage marriage, she says, we should 'stop people from having babies before they get married.'
Research shows that this is a plausible idea: Teen marriages are especially unstable, and once a woman becomes a single mother her prospects for marriage to anyone other than the baby's father are slim. Sawhill advocates that welfare offices keep doing what they're doing; she cites evidence that the demands that young mothers work, and that young men pay child support, have already contributed to the (modest) decline in the number of single-parent families."
Isabel Sawhill, WR&B, The Brookings Institution
"Altared States: Bush tries to promote marriage through welfare reform"
National Review, May 6, 2002
"'There's a lot of research that children are generally better off when they live with two-parent families, if it's a stable relationship,' said Andrea Kane, a welfare-reform and teen-pregnancy expert at the Brookings Institution, a centrist Washington think tank."
Andrea Kane, WR&B, The Brookings Institution
"Welfare Workers Resist Bush Call to Push for Marriage"
Knight Ridder/Tribune News Service, April 14, 2002
"'There is a consensus in the wake of the 1996 law that more people have been able to find work than almost anybody thought,' said Kent Weaver, a welfare policy expert at the Washington-based Brookings Institution. At the same time, Weaver said, there remains a sizable population whose needs are so great the system can't reach them.
"'In the next round, the question is how to help those people who are worse off, without creating incentives to remain so,' Weaver said."
Kent Weaver, WR&B, The Brookings Institution
"Welfare Up For Further Tinkering"
The Houston Chronicle, April 9, 2002
"Researchers across the ideological spectrum agree with the administration's basic premise: Children raised in stable environments with both parents tend to fare better than those who are not. But liberals say there is no guarantee that government efforts to nudge people toward marriages—even if they succeed—will lift them from poverty or produce stable households.
"Isabel V. Sawhill, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution, said poverty among mothers and children appears to be caused less by a failure to marry than by teenage births. 'So I just feel all this talk about marriage is a little bit off-tune,' she said."
Isabel Sawhill, WR&B, The Brookings Institution
Tying Marriage Vows to Welfare ReformThe Washington Post, April 1, 2002
"
Greg Allen: Isabel Sawhill, a welfare expert at the Brookings Institution, says the vast majority of American women, from 90 percent, do get married. She believes the emphasis and the government funding should not be on marriage, but on keeping young, unmarried women from having babies in the first place.
"
Isabel Sawhill: Very young marriages are highly unstable and the focus should be on encouraging those young girls to finish their education, get established in a job and then find a lifetime partner and not have a baby until they are a little bit older."
Isabel Sawhill, WR&B, The Brookings Institution
Morning Edition, National Public Radio
March 13, 2002
listen to audio
"Isabel Sawhill, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution and the president of the National Campaign to Prevent Teen Pregnancy, says there's no evidence to show that 'abstinence-only' programs work. That doesn't mean that the programs are a bust, she said, just that there's no research yet by which to judge them either way.
"...Indeed, four out of 10 girls become pregnant before their 20th birthdays, and two out of 10 go on to become single mothers, according to Sawhill. She adds that half of all mothers receiving welfare benefits had their first baby as a teen."
"The two main Democratic bills introduced this year, by Reps. Benjamin Cardin of Maryland and Patsy Mink of Hawaii, emphasize priorities other than marriage....
"Studies show that only a small minority (12 percent) of eligible welfare families receive child care. According to the Brookings Institution, some states set child care eligibility below the federally permitted 85 percent of state median income, or they establish administrative processes and waiting lists that discourage applications, or they charge co-payments or limit reimbursements for providers."
Isabel Sawhill, WR&B, The Brookings Institution
"WELFARE: Get Hitched, Stay Hitched"
National Journal, March 9, 2002
"Six years ago, one of the most bitterly contested laws of recent times set out to reinvent the welfare system—or, as President Clinton put it, 'to end welfare as we know it.' It also ended the political debate about poverty as we knew it, both on the left and on the right.
"...As Isabel Sawhill, an expert on welfare at the Brookings Institution, put it, 'a new conversation on poverty' has begun, reflecting a political consensus that would have been hard to imagine in 1995 or 1996.
"This conversation focuses, in large part, on what happens after welfare recipients enter the work force. And many of the same questions are being asked by Democrats and Republicans, although the answers may differ.
"...But overall, as Ms. Sawhill, a former Clinton administration official, puts it, 'Almost all of the data is moving in the right direction: caseloads down, employment up, poverty rates down, particularly among children and minority children.'"
Isabel Sawhill, WR&B, The Brookings Institution
"
Welfare in the Post-Welfare Era"
The New York Times, March 3, 2002
"'This is really a budget-driven package—it's how can we make the system work better and not spend much money,' said Kent Weaver, co-director of the Brookings Institution's Welfare Reform and Beyond Initiative.
"Echoing an argument of many critics, Weaver said Bush did not focus enough on helping a subset of the welfare population who, because of drug addiction or other circumstances, have never gotten jobs.
"'When you weaken a safety net on families and push them to work, those who can work will be better off,' Weaver said. 'But for those who can't or won't work—and mostly it's can't—you're talking about people who are worse off.'"
Kent Weaver, WR&B, The Brookings Institution
"Bush Proposes Tightening Clinton's Welfare Reforms"
The Baltimore Sun, February 27, 2002
"R. Kent Weaver, a welfare expert at the Brookings Institution, said that while 'marriage is a good thing and kids do better in a two-parent families, we really don't have a clue about how to do it.'
"Weaver suggested that the motive for the marriage grants was politics, not sound policy.
"'They had to do it to play to their socially conservative base,' he said."
Kent Weaver, WR&B, The Brookings Institution
"Bush Welfare Plan Stresses Work, Matrimony For Poor"
The Houston Chronicle, February 27, 2002
"Children growing up in one-parent families are four times as likely to be poor as those growing up in two- parent households, said Isabel V. Sawhill, a welfare expert at the Brookings Institution, a research organization in Washington, and a former Clinton administration official.
"...[S]ome poverty experts question whether the government's promotion of marriage is the best way to deal with these problems. 'Marriage is a good thing,' Ms. Sawhill said, 'and it would help kids a lot if more were born to married parents, but I'm not sure we know how to do it.'
"The problem is not the lack of marriage, she said, 'it's that people are having babies at an early age, before they're ready to have babies or get married.'"
Isabel Sawhill, WR&B, The Brookings Institution
"
Welfare Chief Is Hoping to Promote Marriage"
The New York Times, February 19, 2002
Brookings Senior Fellow Ron Haskins Joins White House Welfare Reform Effort
Brookings Institution
News Release, February 12, 2002
(See also White House
News Release)
"Fortifying marriages was a major goal of welfare reform, but few states have acted on it, said Ron Haskins, senior fellow at the Brookings Institution and former staff director of the U.S. House Ways and Means welfare subcommittee.
"'Nobody has done as much as publicly and conspicuously as Oklahoma has,' Haskins said."
Ron Haskins, WR&B, The Brookings Institution
"Divorce Rate Stays Steady, Study Shows"
The Sunday Oklahoman, February 10, 2002
"While certainly a function of economic conditions, this phenomena of illegitimacy is also largely a consequence of a changing value system, said Isabel Sawhill, a Brookings Institute scholar who specializes in welfare reform and out-of-wedlock births.
"'Attitudinal data shows a huge shift in the public attitude about out-of-wedlock child bearing,' Sawhill said. 'The younger generation sees it as a another life choice; 30 years ago it was frowned upon and stigmatized.'
"The loosening attitudes had a particular devastating effect in low-income communities because the moral ambivalence interacted with economics.
"'Some people argue what happened is well-paying jobs in manufacturing areas disappeared from places like Detroit and left a lot of unskilled, uneducated minority males jobless or in low-paying jobs,' she said. 'Combine that with poor schools, and the result is a lot of single parents. The males simply were not good marriage material.'
"Another factor was a welfare system that enabled young women to have babies outside of marriage. If men became poor bread winners, then the welfare system became the substitute, Sawhill said."
Isabel Sawhill, WR&B, The Brookings Institution
"
A Painful Cycle For Kids Born Out of Wedlock"
Detroit Free Press, February 4, 2002
"...as R. Kent Weaver shows in his new book,
Ending Welfare As We Know It...Clinton propelled welfare reform to the top of the national agenda.
"...Weaver, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution, explains why welfare reform came to pass in 1996 after decades of false starts. In doing so, he sheds light on one of the most important transformations in modern American liberalism.
"Weaver makes clear that welfare reform was not inevitable; it needed a forceful, national advocate.
"In 1992, candidate Clinton made his pivotal pledge to end welfare as we know it. Much has been written about his promise's political importance. But Weaver's book makes its policy importance clear. Clinton's pledge may have been the most consequential policy stance he took on any issue. By saying he would 'end' AFDC, Weaver says, Clinton set the bar so high that he and Congress had to deliver."
R. Kent Weaver, WR&B, The Brookings Institution
"
Allegiance to the Pledge"
Blueprint Magazine, January 22, 2002
"Under the changes envisioned by the White House, legal immigrants of all ages could qualify for food stamps if they have been in this country for five years—no matter what year they arrived. 'That's a big deal,' said Ron Haskins, who helped write the welfare law of the mid-1990s and is now a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution."
Ron Haskins, WR&B, The Brookings Institution
"
Return of Food Stamps For Immigrants Sought"
The Washington Post, January 10, 2002
^ Back to top